Federal Court Rejects Challenge to Regular Use Exclusion as Violative of UM/UIM “Stacking” Requirements Recently, the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in Dayton v. Hartford Ins., No. 3:20-CV-1833, 2024 WL 1745041 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 23, 2024)...
Is the Customer Always Right?
Service of a Complaint in the Eyes of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court One of the most basic elements to a successful restaurant is good customer service. Similarly, good service, of a complaint, is a basic element of effectively beginning a lawsuit. Recently, in...
Discovery Optional
First Department Upholds Summary Judgment for Plaintiff with Minimal Discovery Exchanged Usually, in a civil action in New York, especially one involving liability under Labor Law § 240(1), some discovery needs to be completed to establish a prima facie case for...
You Don’t Know Jack
Plaintiff Loosens Jack Holding Beam, Gravity Ensues Inevitably, when you read about the Labor Law in New York, you’re going to encounter other laws. Here, a recent decision by the First Department reacquaints us with one of the oldest laws around: gravity. In...
Protected Activity
First Department Digs Deep to Define “Work” Under Labor Law § 240(1) If you have been following along, you know by now that Labor Law § 240(1) affords protection to workers engaged in the erection, demolition, repairing, altering, painting, cleaning or pointing of a...
No Minimum
Crack in Plumber’s Platform is No Joke In a recent decision, the Supreme Court, New York County gave us a reminder that there is no de minims test for the elevation in the elevation-related risk contemplated under Labor Law § 240(1). In Deas v. Turner Construction...
It Wasn’t Me.
Difference Between I and II Runs Out Clock for Labor Law § 240(1) Claim There are competing forces in the law in New York, and if you’ve been following along, it would seem that the Labor Law is consistently King of the Hill. Make no mistake, the Labor Law,...
Cut The Red Wire
First Department Diffuses Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims Car accidents don’t usually feature in Labor Law fact patterns. Injuries to plaintiff in Labor Law claims usually occur on the jobsite, while they are outside of a vehicle, and § 240(1) (the “Scaffold Law”)...
Consistently Irrelevant Inconsistencies
Climbing Wrong Side of Ladder Still Prima Facie for Labor Law § 240(1) Claim If you were wondering “What if plaintiff completely disregards the warning labels on a ladder? Does he still have a Labor Law § 240(1) claim if he then falls off of it?” -- it’s your lucky...
